I did not know glocks are as good...

Discussion in 'Glock Forum' started by CJx, Aug 24, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. CJx

    CJx New Member

    182
    0
    0
    Ever since I took interest in guns, I always thought that Glocks were low quality weapons that malfunctioned frequently and were made cheaply out of cheap parts. Of course I did not do any research on them just heard that they were largely plastic and heard of some jam issues with them.

    Now that I have actually been researching Glocks, I like them more and more with every user account i read or video i watch. I actually think Glocks are very good looking guns, and I had no idea of their reputation as a quality, reliable firearm.

    Basically, I did not knows Glocks are as good as they are :eek: Did anyone else have the presumed opinion that Glocks were low quality like I did? And if you own a Glock, how would you rate your experience with it?
     
  2. mountainman13

    mountainman13 New Member

    11,488
    0
    0
    Lol. Everyone you've been listening to must be 1911 fan boys.
    Glocks have always had the reputation of being extremely tough and reliable guns.
    Name one other gun that you can use the slide to sharpen a knife.
    There is a reason they are the primary choice for law enforcement.
    They are not pretty guns though.
     

  3. karateguy28

    karateguy28 New Member

    146
    0
    0
    Exactly. There are two sides to every story, or in this case, gun. There is not a single gun on this planet that is liked by everybody. There are people that hate the most expensive 1911's, yet praise Hi Points. Bottom line is, you need to decide for yourself. Always go in with an open mind because you never know what you could be missing.
     
  4. DeltaF

    DeltaF New Member

    3,210
    0
    0
    I love Glocks. I trust a Glock more than any other pistol out there to function no matter what I put it through. For a reliable service pistol, I wouldn't pick anything else even if I had the choice.

    Of course I'm biased because that's what I was brought up shooting. The first gun I ever bought was a Glock. And my agency issues Glocks. I live in a Glock world. Other guns may be prettier, shoot tighter groups in competition, and may have smoother trigger pull....

    But I know that when I squeeze my trigger, the Glock goes bang! Every time.
     
  5. ScottA

    ScottA FAA licensed bugsmasher Lifetime Supporter

    7,141
    0
    0
    Oh Glocks are extremely reliable. They are just ugly as sin and feel about as ergonomic as a brick.
     
  6. rifleman1

    rifleman1 New Member

    2,007
    1
    0
    there arealot of great pistols out there,but the glock is just an all around work horse.i own quite a few pistols and revolvers but my everyday go to carry gun is my g19.
     
  7. Argyle_Armoring

    Argyle_Armoring New Member

    891
    0
    0
    Once you go Glock you never go back. Rock out with your Glock out!
     
  8. hardluk1

    hardluk1 Active Member

    2,879
    4
    38
    CJx If you will do some research you will find Chuck Taylors glock 17 bought new in 1988 that's over 300,000 rounds with very few parts issues mainly mantainence, an extractor and finally replaced a barrel do to group size getting a bit big not do to any failure.
     
  9. txpossum

    txpossum New Member

    1,638
    0
    0
    I am solidly in the 1911 camp; I do not especially care for Glocks. I have owned one, shot several, and can say that they do well what they were designed to do. They are reasonably accurate, considering their long, heavy trigger pull (although it seems these have gotten better as time goes on, and, of course, I'm comparing the trigger to that of a 1911, which is a completely different system), are reliable, and take a lot of abuse. To me, they feel like I'm holding a brick, but to each their own.
     
  10. Overkill0084

    Overkill0084 Active Member

    4,910
    2
    38
    I remember my first experience with Glocks. My Dad was an early adopter and had several different ones of differing sizes & calibers. Probably Gen 2 or early Gen 3s. I wanted to like them, really I did. But I came away underwhelmed. I couldn't get past the weird trigger or the clunky ergos. The Gen 4s seem to have made decent progress in this area. Glocks are practical, durable and reliable. This is why they have attracted a large LE following. Though, without a LEO discount, they are overpriced (IMHO) when compared to some of their competitors.
    I don't hate Glocks, I just don't get all the hype either. If forced to purchase my own duty weapon, I'd grab a CZ or an M&P first.
    Before the Glock torture test folks show up...I don't care if you drive a tank over it and still shoot it.
     
  11. therewolf

    therewolf New Member

    8,409
    1
    0
    JMHO, you are looking down the edge of a steep, sharp divide.

    We have Glock lovers, and Glock haters.

    As simply as I can put it, GLs think Glocks can do no wrong,

    and will steadfastly ignore repeated reports of how

    dangerous they are, and how easy it is to hurt yourself while

    CCing. They take safety and torture tests, all performed to

    point up the positive points, while ignoring weaknesses, as

    Divine Gospel from the Almighty Gaston.


    GHs, OTOH, readily ignore the fact that the G has a solid

    rep for dependability and has passed certain torture tests.

    (Many of the same ones which Hi-Point passed with flying

    colors, BTW, but we won't get into that, right now.)


    The difference is that Glock owners share the dubious

    certainty that their pistols, while proclaimed as "safe",

    defy this certainty, and there is a Syndrome which carries

    the manufacturer's name to support this.


    I for one, would never accept a G in purchase or trade,

    because, given their rather spotty safety record, I could

    never, in good conscience, sell one...
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2013
  12. CJx

    CJx New Member

    182
    0
    0
    I have not found any account of an accidental discharge of a Glock. Do you have record of this "spotty safety record?"
     
  13. Axxe55

    Axxe55 The Apocalypse Is Coming.....

    7
    1
    0
  14. Overkill0084

    Overkill0084 Active Member

    4,910
    2
    38
    "Glock Leg" is the term he was politely avoiding. Google it, no shortage of entertainment to be had.
    See example:
    [ame]http://youtu.be/AmRN00KbCr8[/ame]
    "Accidental discharge" is the generous, new age, blame free term. "Negligent discharge" is the more accurate term, IMHO.
    One can argue just how safe the "safe action" design is until the cows come home.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2013
  15. CJx

    CJx New Member

    182
    0
    0
  16. CJx

    CJx New Member

    182
    0
    0
    Accidental discharge is any discharge that is not from a result of the operator of the firearm directly causing the discharge. Negligent discharge would be pulling the trigger on accident, accidental discharge would be a mechanical failure of the weapon causing it to fire.

    There is probably a better term for an AD than accident.

    Also, I heard that video was staged to further make the point of how easy NDs can happen, and that the round was a blank.

    Nevermind, he actually shot himself.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2013
  17. Axxe55

    Axxe55 The Apocalypse Is Coming.....

    7
    1
    0
    negligent and accidental are pretty much used interchangeably with regards to firearms. either one is still a fault of the operator. at no point did i say a fault of the firearm. i think after many years of handling firearms, i full understand that they don't fire unless the trigger is pulled.:rolleyes:
     
  18. Dearhunter

    Dearhunter Supporting Member Supporter

    1,912
    14
    38
  19. manta

    manta Well-Known Member Supporter

    3,021
    38
    48
    You were right the first time. :)

    There is no accounting for taste some people find fat birds attractive.
     
  20. Overkill0084

    Overkill0084 Active Member

    4,910
    2
    38
    Mechanical failure can probably be traced back to negligence on someone's part. For instance, that new trigger kit installed by cousin Bubba. Maybe the installation of a substandard part. Improper assembly? Or in one known instance, the failure to ensure that the holster was actually serviceable. "Accidental" puts forth the notion that no one did anything wrong and excrement just occurs. That's rare in firearms related incidents.
    Even in the event of a gun parts failure, rigorous observation of established safety rules will usually prevent injury or worse.
    Example:
    Once upon a time I had a problem with a new to me 1911 that would double/triple fire w/ one trigger pull. While "Accidental," the problem can be traced back to my "negligence" in failing to perform the trigger adjustment correctly. There were no injuries or damages because all safety rules were followed during firing.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.